new product for bottom anti-fouling

[Alan Wheeler]

I don't think we are going to see world opinion changed by some Californian law office anytime soon. We still have Tin used on commercial shipping after it was banned some ...what...15yrs ago at least?
Copper itslef is not what is causing the issue anyways. Copper simply is not liked by most originisms. It is the biocides that leach out of the fouling paints, designed to controll or stop weed growth, that has the biggest affect on the enviroment. Sure, high and un-natural concentrations of ANY metal ANYWHERE is not good. I am certainly not arguing that high concentrations of copper are OK. But they certainly are not as toxic as Tin is.
We do have major issues around the world though, relating to the clean up of these coatings when removed and applied. Our marina here still has two boat yards that high pressure water blast boat hulls and the wash runs straight back into the sea. It is not collected. Then when the new paint is applied, drips and spills go straight onto the ground and are not collected. I do see this as an issue that needs addressing.

[hellosailor]

Wheels-
"I don't think we are going to see world opinion changed by some Californian law office anytime soon." I agree with you. However, the ruckus in CA involves the US EPA and the US Navy as well, and they tend to reflect US national policy. This is not a CA issue, even though *one* location in CA has been discussed.

The talk of a potential ban that I had read, came from the same international organization (sorry, I don't recall who) that was behind promulgating the TBT ban.

There are two separate issues being crossed here: The San Diego case, which is NOT what I am talking about, and an international pact which has already been signed for TBT--and may be extended to copper. That and that alone is why I am saying a copper ban may be coming, this is not a local US or CA issue. The "world community" is giving it serious discussion. (Although I suppose we can exempt Trinidad and Norway from that...aren't they still endorsing TBT?)

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Alan Wheeler

Copper itslef is not what is causing the issue anyways. Copper simply is not liked by most originisms. It is the biocides that leach out of the fouling paints, designed to controll or stop weed growth, that has the biggest affect on the enviroment.

Copper (cuprous oxide, actually) is the biocide in anti fouling paint.

[delmarrey]

I've been doing some research and it appears one could use the same nonstick substance that are used in frying pans and its not that exspensive. $25 per gal.
It would have to be preheated to spray on but there is already tooling to do so. It would have to be done in a warm enviroment but the cure time would be around an hour. With heat, like in an enclose shop, it would cure even faster. It sticks very well to polyester or epoxy preped properly.
And it's non toxic, the VOS is low and it's flexable with some impact resistance.

I'm still doing research and have considered it for my own boat................_/)

[Alan Wheeler]

fstbttms, that depends on the paint manufacturer. Many manufacturers have much more than just Copper(1) Oxide in their formulae's. Some have some very toxic additives. Cuprous Oxide is not all that toxic. It is dangerouse if it is ingested, but you need a good quantity of it to kill a human. It is also a skin irritant for some people, but interestingly, not all. So far the only OSHA safety requirments in it's handling is to avoid ingesting the stuff and wash if it contacts your skin.
However, It has been found to be very affective (as we all know) at killing Marine orginisms. However, there are some marine plant growths that do not seem to be as affected by the material and so a "biocide" is commonly added to some paints.
If I explain this another way. Cuprous Oxide is what it is. As an antifouling paint, it is simply added to a binder. You can't make the Cuprous Oxide any "stronger" than anyone elses paint mix. Yet we all know that there are paints out there that work better than others. Apart from differences in how the paint "self cleans" (Eg ablative as against hard) most paints are much more complex in their individual formulations and it is safe to say that some paints out there are extremely toxic with extreme care in their handling.

Del, what sort of temperatures are we talking with the coatings?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Alan Wheeler

Many manufacturers have much more than just Copper(1) Oxide in their formulae's. Some have some very toxic additives.

Please elaborate. As someone who makes his living cleaning boat bottoms, I would be very interested in knowing what else is coming off the hull and into the water.

I have to admit that I question your knowledge of the subject, after your "it's not the copper that is the problem" remark. I am pretty well informed on the copper loading issue here in California and I have never heard anybody from the EPA, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Dept. of Boating and Waterways, California State University system or any other stakeholder say that cuprous oxide was not the problem. Nor have I ever heard anybody mention (until now) that there are other, more toxic substances in anti fouling paint that are affecting the environment.

[Alan Wheeler]

Yeah to clarfiy and qualify myself, I am NO EXPERT in the stuff. Only that I did obtain a diploma in paint and coating technologies nearly 20yrs ago, with Epiglass/International products. I have no affiliation with any such company today, nor have for many years.
All my knowledge is based on readily available information from the companies that produce the Cuprous oxide in commercial quantities. From what I have so far studied, I think the REAL issue is that NO ONE and specificaly OSH, has actually done any major health and safety studies on the oxide. All that has been done is a test using Lab Rats. They found that giving the Rats about 400+mg resulted in a 50% death rate. And that is it. It's interesting and a little scary in some aspects that any further knowledge of the substance is a "we think" attitude and that is a "we think it can cause skin iritations in some people".
As for the "other" toxins in antifoul, I have no idea what is used, all I know was what I was taught by Epiglass all those years back. And most of those products are still in use today. Their products DID have toxins in it that were extra to the Cuprous Oxide and they did go into what the toxins were for and how the paint leached them out, but no comment was ever made as to What it was. I guess that would be part of their own "Secret herbs and spices" recipe.
I always stand to be corrected if you have any further details, I am one with a thirst for knowledge.

[delmarrey]

It can be applied at 90 C for a 1 hour cure. The hotter the faster the cure. But I think 90 degrees C would be as hot as one would want to expose a hull to. I haven't found out yet how low a temperature it can be applied. Still researching may have to make a phone call. BTW that was $88 a gal not $25

[GordMay]

As Wheels indicated, ”... Many manufacturers have much more than just Copper(1) Oxide in their formulae's ...”

”Booster Biocides” are a group of organic, or organo-metallic, pesticide compounds, added to Copper & Zinc-based antifouling paints, to improve their efficacy.
They were introduced as alternatives to Organo-Tin compounds in antifouling products, after restrictions imposed on the use of Tributyltin (TBT) began in the late 80's - early 90's *.

Approximately 30 different active biocide substances are used in a variety of anti-fouling products, including (but not limited to):
Benzmethylamide
Chlorothalonil
Copper Pyrithione
Dichlofluanid
Diuron
Fluorofolpet
Irgarol 1051
Sea-Nine 211 < http://www.seanine.com/ >
Mancozeb
Polyphase
Pyridine-triphenyl-borane
TCMS (2,3,5,6-tetrachloro-4-methylsulfonyl) pyridine
TCMTB [2-(thiocyanomethylthio)benzothiazole]
Thiram
Tolyfluanid
Ainc Pyrithione (ZPT )
Ziram
Zineb.

Of these, two herbicides, Irgarol 1051 and Diuron, have become common in boat paints (a recent study in the United Kingdom found that 80 percent of antifouling paints on the market contained either Irgarol 1051 or Diuron).

The “LIST OF ANTIFOULING PRODUCTS PERMITTED ON THE FINNISH MARKET” provides a register of 50 products, naming their active ingredient.
http://www.ymparisto.fi/download.asp?contentid=39743

[hellosailor]

Delmarrey-
"ve been doing some research and it appears one could use the same nonstick substance that are used in frying pans and its not that exspensive. $25 per gal." I thought it was way more expensive than that, at least for genuine DuPont Teflon. I know there are other products out now, but IIRC Teflon has to be applied near a temperature where an FRP hull is going to be very unhappy. Still, it would be simple enough to send out a prop (after cleaning & polishing) and have that Teflon coated. I'm told the speed will rip the coating off but I'd sure like to see it proven one way or the other.

Wheels-
Interesting you mention the "secret herbs & spices". I had the original KFC product in the 60's and remember it as being very different from what the megacorporation serves now. Damfino how they get to "11" when I can taste maybe four including the salt and pepper. Hey, maybe they use eight different kinds of pepper.<G>

Gord, apparently the "Irgarol" is one of the compounds that may be too effective. Kinda like complaining we got new rat poison, and it is killing too many rats. I think we could solve this problem, at least here in the US, by taking all the lawn care companies that use illegal immigrants, and signing them up for the bottom cleaning business. No toxins, just hand labor, done every week for one low "below minimum wage" fee. A buck a month per foot ought to do it. A little hard on the domestic industry...Sorry about that, Fstbttms.<G>

[fstbttms]

Wheeler & Gord,
Thanks for your thoughtful and well-researched replies. It is clear that I do not know nearly as much about the ingredients used in anti-foulings as I should, considering I come in contact with them every day. It is interesting that no regulatory agencies responsible for water quality in this country, that I am aware of, are looking at any other component of bottom paint besides cuprous oxide.

As an FYI, here is the manufacturer's description of Irgarol:

Irgarol&#174; 1051 is a highly specific and effective inhibitor of photosynthesis. This makes it ideal, combined with its very low water solubility, for use in long-life antifouling coatings for marine applications to prevent the growth of algae.

While Irgarol&#174; shows outstanding performance in the control of algae, it has comparatively low biological activitiy to animals in general, including fish, shellfish and humans. It is therefore an ideal active substance for the formulation of biocide packages with a designed performance profile, where it is combined with other active ingredients to control additional target organisms.

In antifoulling paints, Irgarol 1051 is often combined with copper, or copper compounds, such as cuprous oxide, or copper thiocyanate. While Irgarol 1051 effectively controls algae, copper is effective at controlling animals.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Gord, apparently the "Irgarol" is one of the compounds that may be too effective. Kinda like complaining we got new rat poison, and it is killing too many rats. I think we could solve this problem, at least here in the US, by taking all the lawn care companies that use illegal immigrants, and signing them up for the bottom cleaning business. No toxins, just hand labor, done every week for one low "below minimum wage" fee. A buck a month per foot ought to do it. A little hard on the domestic industry...Sorry about that, Fstbttms.<G>

No worries. If you have ever tried to clean a foul, unpainted hull, you'd know what the phrase "cruel and unusual punishment" really means.